Nnamdi Kanu, The Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB) leader was cleared of the 15 counts of charges brought against him by the Federal Government on Thursday, according to the Peoples Democratic Party (PDP) chapter in Abia State.
The court verdict, according to the party, has also reaffirmed its notion that the judiciary represents the ordinary man’s hope.
The Abia PDP, on the other hand, claims the Appeal court merely discharged Nnamdi Kanu and doesn’t have plans of acquitting him but to detain him in prison.
This was in relation to the reports by the Attorney General and Minister for Justice, Mr. Abubakar Malami, and the National Security Council.
The party praised the judgment as uplifting in a statement issued by Abraham Amah, state vice chairman, and acting publicity secretary, and noted that it occurred at a time when Nigeria desperately needed healing.
Abia PDP calls on FG to uphold the verdict in the Kanu case
He claimed that the decision would inevitably bring the nation together and capitalize on its variety.
Amah stated: “At a time like this, the best we can do is to urge Federal Government to obey the court, and show it has respect for the rule of law, which is one of the pillars on which our democracy stands.”
Mr. Aloy Ejimakor, Special Counsel for the Indigenous People of Biafra (IPOB), confirmed to The Guardian that his client has filed an appeal against the Federal High Court ruling that barred IPOB from operating as a terrorist organization.
He stated that the appeal was filed due to his client’s unhappiness with the decision of the Federal High Court in Abuja, as detailed in Justice A. Abdul-order Jafarati’s in Suit No FHC/ABJ/871/2017, which was delivered on January 18, 2018.
Ejimakor noted that the proposed notice and grounds of appeal are put forth in paragraph 3, which will feature seeking reliefs as set out by his client during the Appeal Court hearing. He stated that his client is opposed to the trial court’s decision on two grounds.
Firstly, he claimed that the trial judge committed a legal error when he ruled that “the Attorney General, in his ex-parte application, displayed documents demonstrating the existence of a threat to national security by the Respondent/Applicant and, therefore, imposed the order.”
Ejimakor stated that the Court Appeal seeks an order granting leave to the Interested Party/Applicant to appeal the lower court’s ruling delivered on January 18, 2018.
These were on the grounds set out in the Interested Party/Proposed Applicant’s Notice and Grounds of Appeal filed herewith, as well as any further order or orders as this court may deem fit to make in the circumstances.
About Post Author
